Roads Taken and Not Taken in Contemporary Criticism

Abstract

Even this handful of anthologies of literary theory and criticism' enables one to surmise that very large quantity and variety of work is being done today. Yet these anthologies do not help one to estimate how much better (or worse), in general, literary criticism has become. Not only is it difficult to know with what to compare modern or contemporary criticism-with classical criticism? with traditional criticism? with the criticism of a generation ago?-it is next to impossible to get readers, much less professional critics, to agree about the purposes or effectiveness of criticism. Still more problematic is the distinction often made, but rarely explained, between critical theory and practical criticism, or between the theory of something and criticism of or about it. Surprisingly enough, sophisticated critical polemicists are more likely than one would imagine to be satisfied with crude national labels (French or European versus English or American) in dealing with these issues and distinctions, and in letting them settle very large areas of intellectual discrimination. Names are often enough. Frye and Leavis stir up undignified passions; Derrida and Leavis might provoke